Sorry, I have to disagree<br><br> If a cache owner can not maintain a cache then it should be removed in my opinion. I agree with groundspeak on this as only two things stop false logging.. 1 ) cache owner confirms and removes fake logs 2 ) the cache goes bubye<br>
<br> So before you point a finger at the Heavy Handed Groundspeak, maybe smack your fellow cachers for being lazy and not caring?<br><br>= Dirk / ShadowAce<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 8:47 PM, Richard Hansen <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:richard.hansen@dos2unix.net">richard.hansen@dos2unix.net</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div bgcolor="#FFFFFF"><div>Typical heavyhandedness by groundspeak, looking for any excuse to get rid of virts. <br>
<br><br><div>=</div><div>Richard Hansen</div><div><br></div></div><div><div></div><div class="h5"><div><br>On Mar 16, 2009, at 8:35 PM, AZcachemeister &lt;<a href="mailto:azcachemeister@getnet.net" target="_blank">azcachemeister@getnet.net</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
<br></div><div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div>

I do see in a related thread in the Geocaching forums, that (per a
reviewer and forum mod no less reliable than KEYSTONE) FAILURE to
delete logs by known &#39;armchair loggers&#39; can constitute a lack of
maintenance by the cache owner, and grounds for archival.<br>
C&#39;mon cache owners, lets get this mess cleaned up!<br>
<br>
ACM</div></blockquote></div></div></div></blockquote></div><br>